asscher for review

[Gwyn]

Okay, whats wrong with this asscher LOL


http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=131&item=1022615

 

[Gwyn]

Usually whenever i post a pic of a diamond I think looks nice there is always a slew of reasons why it isn''t so I thought I would just post the above asking what was wrong with it

On another note, I saw some diamonds in a B&M store that was recommended here and looked at a few SI1 asschers. without the microscope You couldnt see the inclusions and i looked, hard. It looked so perfect and Hall of mirrors like I almost bought it! Price was a little high though (about 7K for a Carat) nice D color though, I cant remember the cut but, WOW, very pretty.

got me re-thinking my stance on clarity. If the stone is eye-clean, do the imperfections really make a difference? Or will it ineveitably throw off the sheen and appeal of the diamond, even if you can''t see that it is doing that? Not that asschers have a whole lot of shine going for them....more of a glassy look So pretty

 

[strmrdr]

looks pretty good.
need some better pictures.

Did you look at the si1 outside the jewelery store lights?
spot lighting will hide inclusions.

 

[starryeyed]

Yes, unless you abscond with Kenny''s asscher, you will probably always hear some criticism, just because they are less "spready" than a RB.

I''m not an expert, but this one looks pretty nice to me. The windmills are thick and the diamond looks incredibly clean. Given what you said about SI-1 diamonds, is it worth it to you to pay for a VVS2?

I would imagine you are just so dying to find a stone that wins everyone''s approval that the clarity doesn''t matter!

 

[belle]

Date: 3/13/2007 3:32:33 AM
Author: Gwyn
Usually whenever i post a pic of a diamond I think looks nice there is always a slew of reasons why it isn''t so I thought I would just post the above asking what was wrong with it

On another note, I saw some diamonds in a B&M store that was recommended here and looked at a few SI1 asschers. without the microscope You couldnt see the inclusions and i looked, hard. It looked so perfect and Hall of mirrors like I almost bought it! Price was a little high though (about 7K for a Carat) nice D color though, I cant remember the cut but, WOW, very pretty.

got me re-thinking my stance on clarity. If the stone is eye-clean, do the imperfections really make a difference? Or will it ineveitably throw off the sheen and appeal of the diamond, even if you can''t see that it is doing that? Not that asschers have a whole lot of shine going for them....more of a glassy look So pretty

guess i didn''t need to take all of those pics last time to show how unnoticable si inclusions can be! you just needed to see for yourself

i think the diamond that you posted above looks very nice.

best of luck in your continued search!

 

[starryeyed]

Date: 3/13/2007 9:43:56 AM
Author: belle
guess i didn''t need to take all of those pics last time to show how unnoticable si inclusions can be! you just needed to see for yourself

i think the diamond that you posted above looks very nice.
best of luck in your continued search!

Belle, I remember all of those pictures! Glad you posted all of them because they help to dispel the myth that SI-1 clarity in asschers and emerald-cuts is bad. You showed that a clean SI-1 is definitely within the realm of possibility.

 

[widget]

The stone you linked does look lovely...I like its pronounced octagonal shape..

Regarding clarity: I've seen lots of people here recommend VS clarity or better for stepcuts, and I've disagreed usually silently.

To me, it's ALL about what you can see (or not see) with the naked eye. I'd DEFINITELY CONSIDER SI clarity stones (viewed and OKed by a good vendor)...especially with asschers. They tend to face up small, and I'd rather put my money into carat weight.

JMO
widget

 

[belle]

Date: 3/13/2007 9:59:00 AM
Author: starryeyed

Date: 3/13/2007 9:43:56 AM
Author: belle
guess i didn''t need to take all of those pics last time to show how unnoticable si inclusions can be! you just needed to see for yourself

i think the diamond that you posted above looks very nice.
best of luck in your continued search!

Belle, I remember all of those pictures! Glad you posted all of them because they help to dispel the myth that SI-1 clarity in asschers and emerald-cuts is bad. You showed that a clean SI-1 is definitely within the realm of possibility.

thanks starryeyed, i''m glad you appreciated it.

actual asscher owners such as yourself and widget are an awesome resource to the future of asscher lovers! i hope you both, as well as the many others here that live with asschers everyday, will continue to take the time to throw in your perspective. there is nothing like first hand advice. you are an invaluable resource!

 

[Gwyn]

Date: 3/13/2007 9:43:56 AM
Author: belle
guess i didn''t need to take all of those pics last time to show how unnoticable si inclusions can be! you just needed to see for yourself

i think the diamond that you posted above looks very nice.

best of luck in your continued search!

Yes definitely. I viewed the diamond in store and out, the man I worked with was absolutely great in letting my BF and I view/hold/inspect etc the stones we looked at. He really did have some beautiful stones but the prices just seemed a little high. Then again, for a B&M I am sure they were pretty average. But after looking online non-stop it is hard to think about paying over 7grand (plus the 8.25 percent tax) on a 1 carat SI2 stone. Still, I have not completly discounted it.

 

[Gwyn]

I spoke with Jennifer through James Allen''s Live Help option about the stone posted above. She was very polite and said she would transfer my requests for additional images on to a representative.

Not even 10 minutes later Jim called my cell phone. He said that he would be happy to take additional pictures, including IS image and get me the crown height of the stone and email me tommorow (today).

He also said he could get an ASET image but was not sure how it would photograph. To be honest I did not fully understand what he was saying when he was explaining the issues with emailing the image over so I will have to get further clarification

Another thing he mentioned is that they do this free of charge. When I spoke with the live help representative, she said that the magnified image was all they had and would need to call in the stone which would incure a $30 fee (refundable if you bought the stone). Jim said that because they had the magnified image, they already had the stone and, therefore, there would be no fee.

Just to clarify for any of you who were thinking like I was (that you would always pay a fee for additional pics/ IS images etc) You will only be asked to do so if the magnified image is no already posted on their website

Anyway, to wrap up this post, I will post the images for review/feedback once I get them Hopefully there will be some unmagnified shots in there. Is that an unusual thing to ask for? I am just curious what the diamond will look like to the naked eye (though I guess no photo image is going to be exact).

Until later....

 

[Gwyn]

EEP, I just looked at their website. It says the diamond is no longer available... Is this something they do when someone inquires about a diamond or does that mean someone bought it? I hope it is the former...

 

[Ellen]

Date: 3/14/2007 2:09:12 PM
Author: Gwyn
EEP, I just looked at their website. It says the diamond is no longer available... Is this something they do when someone inquires about a diamond or does that mean someone bought it? I hope it is the former...

Gwyn, I "think" it means he reserved it while you're looking at it. This happened once before with a poster, and indeed Jim had put it on hold while the poster was deciding if he wanted it.

But it might be best to call, just in case.

 

[starryeyed]

Date: 3/13/2007 11:06:41 AM
Author: belle
thanks starryeyed, i''m glad you appreciated it.

actual asscher owners such as yourself and widget are an awesome resource to the future of asscher lovers! i hope you both, as well as the many others here that live with asschers everyday, will continue to take the time to throw in your perspective. there is nothing like first hand advice. you are an invaluable resource!

Definitely Belle! I think empirical evidence is extremely helpful. SI-1 can be hard to judge over the internet without pictures, so people shy away. However, SI-1''s are a great value when you can''t see the inclusion (s), as you demonstrated. Your perspective is really helpful too.

Widget brings up a great point that because asschers face-up smaller, it''s better to get a bigger clean SI-1 than say, a smaller VS1. I have an IF, but that pedigree was more a part of the package, rather than why I bought the stone.

The stone I bought fell slightly outside of the range of what may be considered "kicken" proportions. The ASET image wasn''t that great either. However, I figured, what the heck, I''ll check it out and see if I like the stone. It seemed like an excellent value at the time and WF made it a risk-free purchase. (Hooray WF!)

I bought an ideal-scope. The diamond arrived. I was very pleasantly surprised. The diamond did not look dark or dead, and the ASET image I saw with my own scope was a million times better than the computer image. One thing I learned - photos and ASET images are SUPER sensitive to how the diamond is held. I suppose perfectly "level" can be achieved with a laser-level, but the bottom line is that this is not what is happening on your finger. Asschers are dynamic, which is why you really have to see the diamond.

 

[Gwyn]

Date: 3/14/2007 2:09:12 PM
Author: Gwyn
EEP, I just looked at their website. It says the diamond is no longer available... Is this something they do when someone inquires about a diamond or does that mean someone bought it? I hope it is the former...

YEP! On hold for me

 

[Ellen]

Date: 3/14/2007 3:05:31 PM
Author: Gwyn


YEP! On hold for me

 

[Gwyn]

Alright, I got some images

this first one is a magnified image


HMM this pic was kind of small. let me see if I can resize

 

[Gwyn]

Here is the IS Image

 

[Gwyn]

And here is the sarin report...hmm I am not sure how to resize....

I guess I can tell you all info from it.

1.10 Ct

Width 5.75

Length 5.75

L/W 1.0

Crown Angle 46.2

Crown Height 16.8%

Pavil Angle 36.4

Pavil Dept 48.9%

Table Size 65.1%

Girdle Thickness 3.1%

Total Depth 68.8%

Then there is a number... 3.96 mm...looks like the dept in mm for the image. Hmm I bet I can crop the image and show just the photo....

 

[Gwyn]

alright here is a bigger pic

 

[strmrdr]

That diagram is crazy lol for a round but all we really need is the crown height so thats ok.

So far so good.
If they can do an ASET kewl otherwise as a final check have the sales rep or Jim take a look at it and do a check for even patterns and 10 miles deep but indications are so far it will be kicken.
Passes those id say snag it.

 

[Gwyn]

He does have an ASET but he doesnt have the professional ASET viewer. He said he took the image and looked good (a little light leakage but that is expected with a fancy shape). but there was no way to get a photo of the image to send to me because he doesnt have that peice of equipment or prgram or whatever one needs to do that. I am probably completely butchering what he actually said....

Is the crown height okay? I remember reading that strmrdr recommends 10 - 15%. Not sure if that was a minimum or what. Somethign about it relating to fire.

Jim said he thought it lookedm great, nice pattern nice windmills and such. I think this one might be a keeper

 

[strmrdr]

crown height is fine.
Some of the best today are in that range.
10%-15% is old numbers and since has been changed to over 10%

one thing id have him check is center brightness if you cant get an aset, the larger photo is showing some leakage but looks like tilt and the IS is showing red.

 

[Gwyn]

I believe there is a post somewhere explaining IS images, i searched quickly but didnt come up with it ,anyone know where i can find that? If not I just look through when i get home.

For some reason i thought leakage was black... now im not so sure. I am going to have to do some more researching when i get out of work

I do know that he said that there was some leakage but it was very small, he seemed suprised, like he expected to see more on the ASET.

I will be sure to ask him about the center brightness, I assume that red = brightness and dark = not bright, lol